MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009618427 · doi:10.1002/iroh.200310692

Size‐Fractionated Phytoplankton and Relationships with Metazooplankton in a Newly Flooded Reservoir

2003· article· en· W2009618427 on OpenAlexaff
Rémy D. Tadonléké, Antoine Thouvenot, Daniel Gilbert, Télesphore Sime‐Ngando, Didier Debroas, Jean Dévaux

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review of Hydrobiology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersConseil Régional d'AuvergneCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique
KeywordsPhytoplanktonPicoplanktonPlanktonBiologyBiomass (ecology)ZooplanktonAutotrophChlorophyll aFood webOceanographyMicrobial food webEcologyNutrientBotanyTrophic levelBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In order to yield some insights into the planktonic food web structure of new reservoirs, size‐fractionated biomass and productivity of phytoplankton were examined from 1996 to 1997 (following the 1995 flooding of the Sep Reservoir, Puy‐de‐Dôme, France), in relation to nutrients (P, N) and metazooplankton (Rotifers, Cladocera, Copepods). Autotrophic nanoplankton (ANP, size class 3–45 μm) dominated the phytoplankton biomass (as Chlorophyll a) and production, while autotrophic picoplankton (APP, 0.7–3 μm) exhibited the lowest and relatively constant biomass and production. Cells of the autotrophic microplankton (AMP, >45 μm) were considered inedible for planktonic herbivores. The production‐biomass diagram for the different size classes and the positive correlation between APP production and ANP + AMP production suggested that grazing was potentially more important than nutrients in shaping the phytoplankton size structure. Metazooplankton biomass was low compared to other newly flooded reservoirs or to natural lakes with phytoplankton biomass similar to that of the Sep Reservoir. This resulted in low ratios (metazooplankton to edible phytoplankton) both in terms of production (average 0.43% in 1996 and 0.76% in 1997) and biomass, suggesting that only a small fraction of phytoplankton was directly consumed by metazooplankton. We suggest that the observed low ratios in the Sep Reservoir, reflect possible low metazooplankton inputs in the main influents, changes in hydrologic conditions and a high potential role of microheterotrophs. The latter role was supported by (i) the positive inter‐annual correlation between ciliates and phytoplankton, (ii) the significant and negative correlations between ciliates and metazooplankton, and (iii) the significant and negative correlations between total metazooplankton biomass and total phosphorus (TP), whereas neither TP nor total metazooplankton biomass was correlated with phytoplankton variables.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Review of HydrobiologySame topicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton DynamicsFrench-language works237,207